Pages

Tuesday, July 30, 2013

I've mentioned Ink—Alter Egos Exposed (a Canadian documentary series I took part in a few years back) before here at Creation Point. Ink was a well-crafted, in-depth show about comic books that, unfortunately, never played on a U.S. television station. I just came across several episodes on YouTube, including this one—"Villains"—which concludes with a lengthy discussion of Kraven's Last Hunt. Enjoy!Update: Here's another full episode I found—"Gender and Relationships." I'm in it briefly, discussing the Peter Parker-Mary Jane Watson marriage.

It's always frustrated me, Tom, that the series never showed up in the U.S. My own participation aside, I thought it was an incredibly well-done, respectful and intelligent look at the comics world.

And deep thanks for the kind words about MOONSHADOW. In many ways, it's the book that really started my career—and it's certainly the story that helped me find my voice as a writer. It remains near and dear to my heart.

I know that I'm featured in the GENDER AND RELATIONSHIPS episode, A. Jaye, I posted a clip from it here last year. I think the entire episode may be out there now. If so, I'll add it to the above post!

With all of that talk of why Magneto is sympathetic, aren't humanity sympathetic villains? I f Mutants exist only to replace them, and there mere existences crams that the average human being is obsolete, and has there days numbered, is it really that hard to understand why Mutants are misundertood and hated? And that is excluding that some of them can read your mind or destroy city blocks, and it makes even more sense. For a group that complains about being misunderstood, the X-Men aren't all that understanding. Who is the real prejudice group in the Marvel Universe?

Glad to see that "Going Sane" is finally getting its credit. I'm sure the trade treatment a few years back helped.

Good points, Jack. I've always wondered why people were so freaked out about mutants in particular, when the entire Marvel universe is filled with super-beings, gods and aliens that, looked at a certain way, are just as frightening.

GOING SANE remains one of my all-time favorite stories and I was very surprised, and delighted, to see it get that spotlight.

You I know, I hear this question a lot. And I don't understand it. First of all characters like Thing cause a stir in people and have since the beginning. The Hulk is hated and feared. Hell the entire army has chased him. Spider-man is loathed to. Also, the heroes that are not hated tend to have no superpowers, or very muted ones, seriously, do you think that the average citizen in Marvel's New York thinks Daredevil even has powers? Doc Strange is powerfulish, but most people don't think he has powers, Silver Surfer is rejected, and Namor has been villain adjacent since the 30s.

Now beyond that, think about what are. the Next step inhuman evolution. Reed Richard goes into space and gains powers, but he was a man first. A normal, if very smart guy, but one of us. He has just been advanced. Mutants are the future. A constant reminder that humans don't matter anymore. And if you have a human kid, well the Earth is not for them anymore.

It makes perfect sense.

Wishing you nothing, but goodwill and hipness from here to the stars,Jack

Makes sense on one level. I still don't see the big difference in a world of gods and aliens and immortals and all other kinds of super beings who could be viewed as equally threatening to the human race.

But once again, aren't most super powered people not trusted in the Marvel universe.

Also, one could look at superheroes under a different light. People like the Fantastic Four have proven themselves as having the common god in mind, but what about the jackass down the street? Most people don't mind the military having tanks and jets, but if someone moves into your neighborhood with functioning ones and goes on patrol, you would start to feel a bit uneasy. After all, doesn't shield look over the super-community? Well who looks after the guy in 48 who I saw microvaing a pissa with a beam from his hand?

Wishing you nothing, but goodwill and hipness from here to the stars,Jack .

Not to mention, I would argue it isn't a fear of safety in the case of mutants. It is the fear of being replaced, and obsolete. That is a bit harder to shake. You can warm up to a group if it is based off of fear that they'll hurt you. When you are afraid that they are going to replace you, that is far harder to shake. That will last longer. A few guys taking a cosmic ray bath, or some jerk build a suit of armor, or a spider imbued with radioactive magic bites a guy, no big deal, isolated incidents, and they have proven them selves. A whole batch of people coming up and satin, "Yes we are homo superior, we are better that you, and one day we will replace you," well that is different. They could be the nicest guys in the world, but the fact is that they are still here to replace you. YOU DON'T MATTER ANYMORE. That is the real fear. It isn't fear for safety. It is ore existential.

Wishing you nothing, but goodwill and hipness from here to the stars,Jack .

Good points, Jack, but I'll never be completely convinced. If the X-Men were the only superpowered beings in the Marvel Universe, then the idea works perfectly. With all the other superbeings, gods and aliens running around...I don't completely buy it. That said, you make a lot of sense! (But you always do.)

First off, thanks for the from you and David on the last topic. Rest assured, I love our little triune of conversations as well.

DAVID: As far as your DD comments go... I agree (I know shocker). I love Miller's Daredevil, especially Born Again, that is his true masterpiece in my eyes. But really, his Dark Knight Returns and Sin City, well I just like it. I enjoy it. I would not necessarily say it is the first thing a person looking to get into comics should read. Honestly, I enjoy Brubaker's Criminal far more. If nothing else it's written better. I really like BAtman: Year One, and have soft spot for Big Guy and Rusty (even if the short lived cartoon was better. Everything he has done in the last decade or so, that I haven't mentioned any way, I just didn't like.

Next: As far as EC goes, I would say Shock Suspenstories are really the ones to read. The horror is interesting, except when it is formulaic. The Sci-fi is a bit schlocky or repetitive. The crime is pretty good when done well. The Impact stories in Shock Suspenstories is the best, and the other genres in the issues are probably the right balance for the others.

We have played some fun games at this sight, how about this one... what bands /performers would what comic characters love. eel free to shirk it off just seemed fun... and hard if they like something you don't. Let's start with the JLA and 60s Marvel.

Finally. I noticed a recommendation for Air Boy. Well, if you recall my previous recomendations for 200-2012 In forgot 1 or 2.

1) Peter David's CAptain Marvel run. It was great. I can't believe I forgot it. It was amazing.2) Criminal by Ed Brubaker. I think I mentioned it, but this Incognito, and the new horror-Noir are really good. Very well written by a man in his element.

Wishing you nothing, but goodwill and hipness from here to the stars,Jack

I remember some writer saying he was a big band fan, and I could see that. But a defing style? No. Someone said Sinatra. I don't see it. A bit of for cap.

I see Cap being a big Woodie Guthrie fan. The down tho Earth nature. The concerns for the poor and down trotted, the outspoken hatred for fascism. The rich lyrics and voice full of character, and thought, This is Steve Rogers guy.

Maybe more next time.

Wishing you nothing, but goodwill and hipness from here to the stars,Jack .

But, the Captain America comic opens in early 1941, possibly 1940. Cap's formative years and taste would have been made in the 30s.

And I don't dispute that he may enjoy big band music, I just maintain that Guthrie would be more preferred. Not only when you look at the views matching up, but when you look at Cap's personality. He seems like a guy who would enjoy a good night on the town, but Steve Rogers is hardly a Casanova. He enjoys times of quiet reflection and relaxation when not training, or fighting the good fight. Sure he would probably dig the big band sound, and even have it bring back some nostalgic memories, but his record collection would be more Guthrie. That's who I think be his Beatles, to compare him to that weirdo who runs this sight... what's his name again?

Wishing you nothing, but goodwill and hipness from here to the stars,Jack .

Big Band music was around in the 30's, it just kept evolving in the 40's. And Steve Rogers could have been listening to the young Sinatra, crooning with the Tommy Dorsey band, in 1940. Steve was probably 17 or 18 at the time, so that music could easily have been very important to him. Did they ever fix a specific year when Cap disappeared? Was it 1944?

I understand the thematic connection to Guthrie, but I don't think Steve would have been a folk music kind of guy. I'll ask him, though, the next time we go out to lunch!

I don't know though. Pre-Cap Steve was always shown as being thoughtful sensitive young man. Does that exclude Big Band? Of course not. I do think that it promotes Guthrie though. And when you factor in his artistic ambitions, and how he veered toward art with story, I would think he would appreciate the story aspect.

Besides, can't you just picture Cap singing this to himself: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKVnur5DkdI

Sinatra I can't see for Steve though. Come on, that was what he would listen to just o pick up a chick. :"oh yeah... yeah I love him. rank Sinatoras is one of my favorites. Oh yeah, yeah Sinatra... that's what I meant."Too much about image for Cap. Hate him? No. But not love.

And I think it was in 1945 Cap froze. It slides depending on who is writing. I could swear I saw Steve as Cap on D-Day. And I have a strong feeling I've read captions for his story that said 1945. The only thing for sure is that it was before the invasion of Berlin.

Wishing you nothing, but goodwill and hipness from here to the stars,Jack .

Just checked Wikipedia and the entry says Cap went cryonic in April of 1945, so he plenty of time to soak up all that great 40's music and pop culture.

Re: Sinatra. I see Young Steve as a romantic, too; I could see him staring at the ceiling, pining for some girl, listening to Dorsey-era Sinatra. If I ever write the character again, though, maybe I can slip in a little Woody G.

I just watched the second of the two episodes you posted, and it really is well done.

Comics are intended to draw readers, of course, so when publishers needed over 100,000 in sales of most issues to keep the run alive, it made sense to target a wider audience. Societal taboos aside, neither gay nor married probably fit the demographics.

I believe Bulletman was originally dating and then married Bulletgirl in the old Fawcett line, and that was Fawcett's second most popular character(s). Stan Lee would have (or should have) remembered that. Marvel did take the FF marriage much farther, of course.

I agree with Jack about the Daredevil run. Terrific stuff. And, I really did like your JL run. It was fun.

The superhero collaborations with Mazuchelli (BORN AGAIN, BATMAN: YEAR ONE) and Romita, Jr. (THE MAN WITHOUT FEAR).

His solo crime noir work (SIN CITY) and independent superhero stuff (HOLY TERROR, with a character who stands in for the role Batman was originally to take).

And then there's his later superhero stuff (DARK KNIGHT STRIKES AGAIN and ALL-STAR BATMAN AND ROBIN).

I think he's a lot like Jack Kirby in that respect, as you've got people who think he was never as good as when he was with Stan Lee and then others who vastly prefer solo stuff like FOURTH WORLD. So there's several interesting creative phases where fans are either going, "That's not MY Frank Miller!" or "Wow, now he's really cutting loose and creating ART!"

I know some have reacted strongly to Miller's politics as of late, but that strikes me as a bit unfair. You go back and look at THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS and he takes shots at people of EVERY political persuasion. People focus on the Reaganism because that's what corrupts Superman, but then you've got Carrie's parents who lament the days when people marched for civil rights while they're smoking pot and ignoring their daughter, or the constant talking heads psycho-babble about Batman's villains being victims of HIS insanity. So it's not as if his 80s stuff was cheerleading liberalism or moderation in the way some people seem to think.

My point of departure with his work is less political than tonal. Miller's heroes have always been men of action, people who don't give a damn what society thinks. He just reached a point where that quality was exaggerated until I couldn't relate anymore. When Batman is making Robin eat rats to teach him life lessons, I'm out! (Even though I suspect Miller was being satirical.)

I'll defer to everyone else's wisdom on Steve's 30s and 40s musical preferences, as I'm not acquainted with the era. I think he could rock out to some "Empire State of Mind" these days though.

I do think a story set in the 30s and 40s where Bruce Wayne interacts with Sinatra has potential. I remember reading somewhere that the comic book format was essentially backed by mobsters. Might be a fun idea to explore.

True, the first publisher of National (DC) Comics had heavy mob ties. Some even say he may have done some darker works, besides just being connected. So in a very real way batman exists BECAUSE of Mobsters.

As for Frank, well, I think age id play on him a bit, and so did the events of the world. But, hey who can't claim that to be true. In the end, I think Miller just needs an editor to rope him in. I'm sorry, but some people do. Even Ronin, which I like, has some sort of odd things that one might associate more with later Miller. I think that the worst thing to happen to Frank Miller for me, was that he became big and publishers sort of stopped questioning him. Talent is great, but you need to be able to focus it properly, and some can, and some need someone else to do the focusing. Honestly, whether I agree with Frank Miller's politics should be irrelevant. Robert Heinlein wrote both fairly liberal and fairly conservative biased stories in his life, and while I may not agree with all of his views, I do agree he was a good and entertaining writer. In a very real way Miller is like Ditko. Once he got to do what he wanted he alienated people, not because of what he said, but how. Beyond that, it isn't just politics. I think his work got a bit lazy. His later works, the characters lack depth. And he often takes short cuts to bring people in. All-star Batman is not Miller being crazy, it is his using shock value. And this is very sad because, One of my favorite comics, period, Born Again, was written by this same guy. Maybe Miller is just an example of the difference in climbing for a summit, and reaching it.

DEMATTEIS: So, your finally coming around on Guthrie, eh? Excellent. Be honest, it was that clip, wasn't it? Think about everything you remember about Cap, both that you wrote and read, then listen any Guthrie song, really listen. If you still don't think this would be one of Steve's top guys, I'll say why Big Band may make sense. Which i can see a very real reason based on Mr. Rogers.

Still don't see Sinatra though. Too much of the pretty boy for Rogers I think. It isn't a lack of talent, but in the beginning it was so much about image, I think that would turn Cap off a bit. I think the 50s Sinatra may appeal to him, but he was frozen for that. Is Rogers a romantic? sure, beyond his pining for the ladies in his life, he also has a very romantic view of the American Dream. And that probably good. But I is so much the down to Earth guy. A what you see is what you get type. Image based acts might not make him loathe them, but probably not draw him all the way in.

here is one that can probably (hopefully) be agreed on by all:

O'Neil and beyond Green Arrow: Bob Dylan. Probably the later Beatles to. But especially Dylan when he pulled that hard traveling heroes gig.

If you have the time: your up Dematteis...

Wishing you nothing, but goodwill and hipness from here to the stars,Jack

I will say this though, Hal Jordan, with all that west coast, jet age flair... there is your rat pack fan. can't you just see him speeding off in an emerald blaze after defeating Sinestro on Saturday night to catch the last show at the Sands?

Wishing you nothing, but goodwill and hipness from here to the stars,Jack

From USA Today (as you know):"Maybe the sins the Stranger has committed aren't sins at all. Maybe they've been part of a larger plan," DeMatteis says. "For the past 2,000 years, the Phantom Stranger has worn the cloak of a villain, perhaps the most despised villain in all of history. Could that portrayal be completely wrong? I'm not saying that's how it will play out, but it's certainly an area we'll be exploring."

Certainly sounds like our earlier discussion.

And, it raises 2 interesting conundrums: (1) when is villainy different from immoral or unethical behavior? (2) And what of poor Sophie in "Sophie's Choice"? When is apparent villainy an actual act of necessity? Is a man a villain if sacrificing a lamb is needed to save the souls of the human race? The second one's been a debate among more than a few Christian theologians over the years. The first has been a subtle (or not so subtle) subject of quite a few comic stories over the years.

Personally, I think PS would be well served with a giant Slurpee and a trip to the shore.

Not a mess at all, Rick. You pose fascinating questions...exactly the kinds of questions I intend to explore in PHANTOM STRANGER. In my mind, there's MUCH to PS than people realize...and his role in the DCU is much bigger.

The Romance one brings up another interesting point. They talk about the marriage issue being problematic for sexually frustrated teenagers. But how does him cycling through women not propose an equal or worse level of resentment? For that matter, wouldn't having Peter trapped in perpetual exile from the feminine nation not make them feel, just sort of depressed about it? I feel if you are using that as your barometer than there is no real 100% win. Just me though. I liked Pete and MJ together... though admittedly I do think it was better when she was no longer a supermodel, and was not a HUGE star. And the Parker luck took a BIT of the success away to make it a more accessible relationship.

Wishing you nothing, but goodwill and hipness from here to the stars,Jack

I agree that having MJ be a supermodel or a huge star works against the essence of Peter Parker. I never saw her that way (maybe I just blocked those stories out of my mind.) To me, she was an independent woman, struggling to make it. It was their love and devotion that made the relationship for me. But, even there, I understand why some people didn't buy it. They want their Peter Parker hapless and unlucky in love. And it's a valid viewpoint.